Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Onplana

by io.github.Onplana
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

portfolio_summary

Read-onlyIdempotent

Aggregate metrics for one portfolio: project count, task totals, status breakdown, RAG distribution, currency-normalized budget rollup. The budget rollup counts only projects whose cost the caller may read (budget.read); budgetHiddenCount is how many visible projects it leaves out. plans gives each visible plan its RAG (a Planner plan is judged on its tasks' progress and dates, GREY when it has none) and url. attention lists the open issues and risks across the plans, the cross-plan dependencies whose predecessor is late, and each plan's next late milestone, each row with its url. While the staleness score is on, each plan carries staleness: days since a person last wrote to it, its cadence (tasks due per week) and a level (CURRENT, QUIET or STALE). A plan with a finished schedule risk run carries scheduleRisk, as get_project gives it (p80 finish, chance of the target or plan date). Requires BUSINESS+ portfolios feature + org.portfolio.manage permission (MANAGER+ default). For per-project detail use get_portfolio.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "portfolioId": "<portfolioId>"
    },
    "name": "portfolio_summary"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
portfolioIdYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already cover safety (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world), yet the description still adds substantial behavior: the budget rollup only counts projects whose cost the caller may read (budget.read) and budgetHiddenCount reports how many visible projects are excluded. It also defines RAG judgment rules (GREY for plans with no tasks), the contents of the attention list, staleness semantics (days since a person wrote, cadence, CURRENT/QUIET/STALE), and conditional scheduleRisk presence — none of which the annotations convey.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with the headline metric list, then sections on budget, plans, attention, staleness, and scheduleRisk in a logical order; nearly every clause carries semantics. It is dense and a few sentences (the plans/RAG sentence especially) are heavily nested and slow to parse, but nothing is filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

No output schema exists, and the description compensates by describing each returned section, field names (budgetHiddenCount, plans, attention, staleness, scheduleRisk), and conditional-presence rules. For a read-only aggregate tool with one required param, an agent has everything needed to call and interpret it.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

There is a single parameter (portfolioId) with 0% schema description coverage, so the description carries the burden but only implies the argument via 'one portfolio' without stating whether it is an ID, key, or name. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the parameter is self-evident in name, but the format ambiguity is a real gap.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb+resource ('Aggregate metrics for one portfolio') and immediately enumerates the exact contents: project count, task totals, status breakdown, RAG distribution, budget rollup. It also names the sibling it is not ('For per-project detail use get_portfolio'), so an agent can distinguish it without opening a schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives a clear routing rule against get_portfolio for per-project detail, plus the prerequisites (BUSINESS+ portfolios feature, org.portfolio.manage, MANAGER+ default) that gate a successful call. It stops short of stating when this tool should NOT be reached for beyond that single alternative.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All Onplana toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources